Tandem wing comparisons, studies

cluttonfred

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
31 December 2008
Messages
1,418
Reaction score
327
Website
cluttonfred.info
Hi, all! I have a weakness for tandem wing designs including of Mignet, Delanne, Miles and others. I wonder if anyone knows of any academic or scholarly analyses of the the pros and cons of tandem wings vs. canards vs. conventional configuratons, or the the pros and cons of various tandem wing configurations?

Thanks and regards,

Matthew
 
Mole said:
Hi, all! I have a weakness for tandem wing designs including of Mignet, Delanne, Miles and others. I wonder if anyone knows of any academic or scholarly analyses of the the pros and cons of tandem wings vs. canards vs. conventional configuratons, or the the pros and cons of various tandem wing configurations?

Thanks and regards,

Matthew

Hi Matthew,
You can try this web-page but it's in French:

"Stabilité et formule Mignet: Nouvelles réflexions sur la stabilité longitudinale des appareils de formule Mignet."
(Stability and the "Mignet" formula: New reflexions on the longitudinal stability of the Mignet formula aircraft)

http://inter.action.free.fr/publications/stabilite/stabilite.html

and, on the same site:
"Des couacs chez les canards" (Ooops, difficult to translate, something like: "Quack" for the canards)
http://inter.action.free.fr/publications/canards/canards.htm

All the best,
Philippe
 
Thanks for these, Philippe, and French is no problem. I do actually have a lot of info on the Mignet configuration but not much on any other tandem designs. I am particularly looking for something objective on the pros and cons of the Delanne configuration. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
 
And if you find something, please share it here as I am fascinated by the Delanne designs as well.

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 
There was the early tandem wing UAV Alliant Techsystems RQ-6 Outrider
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app2/q-6.html

It didn't work very well and even after a significant redesign the conventional RQ-7 Shadow was deemed better.
 
I found three past articles on the Delanne designs in an index of French magazine FANA DE L'AVIATION. Do any of our French-speaking members have these in their collections?

12/1988 No. 229 p20
Delanne : une certaine formule
1ère partie
Liron Jean

01/1989 No. 230 p14
Delanne : une certaine formule
2ème partie
Cuny Jean

02/1989 No. 231 p33
Delanne : une certaine formule
3ème partie
Cuny Jean / Lebourg J.

Cheers,

Matthew
 
Yes, I do, thanks, and I have corresponded with Koen. But I am still looking for something more technical on tandem wings, especially the Delanne configuration. Cheers, Matthew
 
Dr. Daniel P. Raymer's textbook talks about tandem wings. He says that it's best to design a tandem-winged aircraft with each wing as far separated as possible from the other, both in the vertical and horizontal planes. Otherwise, the second wing will lose lift due to airflow disturbance coming off of the first wing.
 
Thanks for that. My understanding, though, is that there can be favorable interaction between the two wings, notably reducing induced drag in cruise and/or greatly improving low-speed handling, depending on the focus of the design.
 
Some useful discussions:

Bottomley, J. W. "Tandem-Wing Aircraft", Aerospace, vol. 4, October 1977. pp.12-20. Hard to get hold of but well worth the effort.

Miles, George H. "The Tandem Monoplane", Flight, 27 April 1944. pp.444-6. (First page - then click through the side pane to read the others.)

Poulsen, C. M. "The Tandem Monoplane: Does it Still Have a Future? Some Past Experiences Recalled", Flight, 12 August 1943, pp.167-8. (Page 1, Page 2)
 
Last edited:
Dr. Daniel P. Raymer's textbook talks about tandem wings. He says that it's best to design a tandem-winged aircraft with each wing as far separated as possible from the other, both in the vertical and horizontal planes. Otherwise, the second wing will lose lift due to airflow disturbance coming off of the first wing.

also consider that the farther apart the tandem wings, the more stable in pitch. Pitch stability is important for transport airplanes if cargo is not perfectly balanced.
 
My understanding is Delanne found a 'sweet spot' for vertical and horizontal separation, providing 'constructive interference'. The Germans, unable to 'reverse engineer' his design to apply to bigger aircraft, handled him unkindly...

I still get the giggles when I see pics of the Delanne-style STOL Lysander conversion with that ruddy great 'bomber' turret on its butt.
I must wonder if it was intended for nocturnal jaunts into Occupied France, when tail-gunner would have given unwary Luftwaffe night-fighters a very nasty surprise. And mowed down Feldgrau who emerged from the field's hedgerow...

Post-war, I was very impressed by the Lockspeiser design, intended for back-country / rough-field work, its bay sized to ferry spare wings, engine etc to stranded sibs. Sadly, the flown sub-scale prototype was destroyed in a hangar fire...
 
My understanding is Delanne found a 'sweet spot' for vertical and horizontal separation, providing 'constructive interference'. The Germans, unable to 'reverse engineer' his design to apply to bigger aircraft, handled him unkindly...

I still get the giggles when I see pics of the Delanne-style STOL Lysander conversion with that ruddy great 'bomber' turret on its butt.
I must wonder if it was intended for nocturnal jaunts into Occupied France, when tail-gunner would have given unwary Luftwaffe night-fighters a very nasty surprise. And mowed down Feldgrau who emerged from the field's hedgerow...

Post-war, I was very impressed by the Lockspeiser design, intended for back-country / rough-field work, its bay sized to ferry spare wings, engine etc to stranded sibs. Sadly, the flown sub-scale prototype was destroyed in a hangar fire...
I have read that the Lysander was intended for strafing the beaches during the expected German invasion following the fall of France.
 
Thank you, Iverson, looks like you've called it !!

Still, I reckon it would have made SOE ferry trips much more fun...
 
My understanding is Delanne found a 'sweet spot' for vertical and horizontal separation, providing 'constructive interference'. The Germans, unable to 'reverse engineer' his design to apply to bigger aircraft, handled him unkindly...

I still get the giggles when I see pics of the Delanne-style STOL Lysander conversion with that ruddy great 'bomber' turret on its butt.
I must wonder if it was intended for nocturnal jaunts into Occupied France, when tail-gunner would have given unwary Luftwaffe night-fighters a very nasty surprise. And mowed down Feldgrau who emerged from the field's hedgerow...

Post-war, I was very impressed by the Lockspeiser design, intended for back-country / rough-field work, its bay sized to ferry spare wings, engine etc to stranded sibs. Sadly, the flown sub-scale prototype was destroyed in a hangar fire...
I have read that the Lysander was intended for strafing the beaches during the expected German invasion following the fall of France.

Westland's test pilot Harald Penrose tells (Adventure with Fate, pp.184-188) how the tandem Lysander was the fourth attempt at such an invasion-attack conversion, following the fitting of twin Oerlikon cannon, followed by the "Pregnant Perch" with ventral gun turret and yet another with dorsal turret replacing the rear cockpit. All had turned out to be bad ideas.

Chief Designer WEW Petter's mind then went back to five years earlier, when Penrose and Arthur Davenport had met Mignet with his Flying Flea. Davenport (after forbidding Penrose from flying the evil-looking little critter) had subsequently suggested building a transport version with good CG range.* The Delanne tandem-wing had recently hit the news and Petter now put two-and-two together.

France had not yet fallen, so he and and Penrose were able to go over and meet Delanne. The Frenchman was building his latest plane "in a nearby stable" and Petter was much impressed by it, while Penrose got to fly one of the sub-scale test planes, the Delanne 20, at Villacoublay and was equally impressed.

The Arsenal works went on to build Delanne's next design to fly, the Arsenal-Delanne 10. Penrose also notes that "Petter's ... tandem-wing Lysander and the Delanne equivalent ... were mutually influenced." But whether the Arsenal machine was the one from the stable finished off, or a new design following the Westland visit, is not recorded.

By the way, the Internet is full of the designations P.12 and "Wendover" for the tandem Lysander. I have half a dozen references discussing it, and none refers to either of these designations. They refer to it only as the tandem Lysander, the Delanne Lysander or the Lysander Duo-Mono. Does anybody know the source of the other two?

* Someone in France has produced a homebuild light transport in the form of a giant Flea, I can't recall who offhand.
 
Last edited:
My understanding is Delanne found a 'sweet spot' for vertical and horizontal separation, providing 'constructive interference'. The Germans, unable to 'reverse engineer' his design to apply to bigger aircraft, handled him unkindly...

I still get the giggles when I see pics of the Delanne-style STOL Lysander conversion with that ruddy great 'bomber' turret on its butt.
I must wonder if it was intended for nocturnal jaunts into Occupied France, when tail-gunner would have given unwary Luftwaffe night-fighters a very nasty surprise. And mowed down Feldgrau who emerged from the field's hedgerow...

Post-war, I was very impressed by the Lockspeiser design, intended for back-country / rough-field work, its bay sized to ferry spare wings, engine etc to stranded sibs. Sadly, the flown sub-scale prototype was destroyed in a hangar fire...
I have read that the Lysander was intended for strafing the beaches during the expected German invasion following the fall of France.
Beach strafing was a "last gasp", desperate measure to find a roll for Lysanders., which had proven dangerously slow during the Battle for France in 1940.
My great uncle Wilbur Van Vliet commended the first RCAF squadron to reach England during World War 2. They flew army cooperation Lysanders and were scheduled to straf Germans approaching Dunkirk. Sadly, the day before, an RAF squadron of Nimrod biplanes got ripped to shreds over Dunkirk, so RACF 1 Squadron's mission was cancelled.
Later in the war, Mr. Van Vliet commanded BCATP bases in Canada that re-used Lysanders as target tugs to train aerial gunners. The yellow and black Lysnaders towed canvas sleeve targets (similar to wind socks) so that gunners in Fairey Battles or Bollingbrookes or Ansons could practice.
 
I have read that the Lysander was intended for strafing the beaches during the expected German invasion following the fall of France.
Beach strafing was a "last gasp", desperate measure to find a roll for Lysanders., which had proven dangerously slow during the Battle for France in 1940.

That desperation bit is not true.

The Lysander may be compared to its German counterpart, the Fieseler Storch. Both were deployed operationally in some numbers for army cooperation, liaison and artillery spotting duties. The War Office hated it on principle because it was developed to an Air Ministry specification and not one of theirs, cue much slagging-off on any grounds which occurred to the martinet of the moment. Its main problem was that it was too slow and easy meat; many were shot down. Obsolete after a couple of years in its original role, its rough-ground, short-field performance found it a new one is special duties, flying spies in and out of occupied France; a very dangerous mission in which heavy casualties were bound to occur. Yet the Storch was twice as slow and remained in service in its original role throughout the war, and nobody whined about how obsolete it was or how many got shot down.

Westland began development of an anti-invasion variant at a time when they were still ramping up production of what was regarded as a successful aeroplane, in its original role. The Delanne tandem was the ultimate effort in that direction, before the focus shifted to the Special Forces mission. Ultimately, the Lysander did a series of dirty and dangerous jobs which took their inevitable toll until, like so many of its contemporaries developed before the war, it became obsolete.
 
Last edited:
Yet the Storch was twice as slow and remained in service in its original role throughout the war, and nobody whined about how obsolete it was or how many got shot down.
That's a very peculiar choice of words to describe the freedom of speech under Nazy rules.
 

Attachments

  • cargo pou.jpg
    cargo pou.jpg
    102.1 KB · Views: 17

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom